Appealing ineligibility and/or funding decisions
Introduction
This policy sets out HSC R&D Division policy for handling appeals related to either ineligibility or funding decisions in funding schemes where HSC R&D Division is the sole funder.
Proposals are usually evaluated in open competitions via a combination of independent peer review and strategic fit. In making its decision regarding funding, HSC R&D Division considers the peer review assessments of the scientific and technical merits of a proposal, but also the value to the HSC of the research programme and the budget availability.
It is important to note that disagreement with peer reviewers or panel members’ comments are not grounds for an appeal. However, applicants may appeal if they consider that the process for assessing eligibility or reviewing their application was not adhered to or that it was not conducted fairly.
Appealing ineligibility and/or funding decisions
Appealing ineligibility decisions: The Guidance Notes for all HSC R&D Division funding schemes clearly set out eligibility criteria. After the submission of applications to a scheme, designated HSC R&D Division staff assess eligibility of all applications against the criteria and requirements set out in the scheme documentation. In some instances, HSC R&D Division may direct specific queries to the lead applicant before deciding on eligibility. If the response to HSC R&D Division does not provide sufficient information or the applicant fails to respond to a specific query within a set time frame, HSC R&D Division will make its decision based on the information provided. HSC R&D Division may consult with the assigned Chair of the review panel for input and endorsement where the scope of any research proposal is considered ineligible. Once HSC R&D Division decide that an application is ineligible, a letter is issued to the lead applicant stating the reason for the ineligibility. Applicants may appeal if they think their application was not treated fairly and/or consistently.
Appealing funding decisions: Guidelines on HSC R&D Division review process and the assessment criteria for each scheme are provided when the call for applications is issued. Funding decisions are usually based on two factors: 1) the rating of an individual application based on the specific assessment criteria for the scheme and 2) in competitive calls, the ranking of that application compared to all other applications to the scheme and the budget available. Applicants may appeal if they think that the grant review process as set out in the scheme documentation was not conducted fairly and/or consistently.
Appeals process has three stages:
Stage 1 (informal)
Applicants are strongly encouraged to make contact in first instance with the Research Office in the relevant Host Institution, as they may be able to address the concern(s).
Before formalising an appeal to HSC R&D Division, applicants are encouraged to make informal contact with the HSC R&D Division Programme Manager responsible for the scheme to seek clarifications or further details. Contact must be initiated within five working days of notification of the outcome of an application process.
If the applicant is not satisfied with the response received from the Programme Manager, they may want to start a formal appeal process (stages 2 & 3). Formal appeals must be initiated within 15 working days from the date of the last communication with the Programme Manager.
Stage 2 (formal)
An applicant may submit a written request for a review to the HSC R&D Division Assistant Director. The request must clearly state the grounds for the appeal and must be endorsed by the Research Office of the Host Institution. The Assistant Director will review the steps taken and issue the outcome of their assessment, in writing, within 15 working days. The response will be sent to the applicant and copied to the Research Office of the Host Institution.
Stage 3 (formal)
If not satisfied, the Host Institution may request a further review by the Director of Research for HSC within five working days from the date of the last communication under stage 2. The request must be in writing and must be signed by the President/Provost/Pro Vice Chancellor/CEO (or equivalent) of the Host Institution and by the applicant. The request should explain why the institution is not satisfied with the review of the process or why the Institution wishes to proceed with a further review of the fairness of the process conducted by the Assistant Director. The Director of Research for HSC will review this request and provide the outcome of the further assessment, in writing, to the Host Institution within 15 working days. At the discretion of the Director of Research for HSC, a third-party expert may be invited to examine the case and make a recommendation. The decision made by the Director of Research for HSC is final.